Case: Akhtar v. Burzynski

8:02-cv-00245 | U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Filed Date: March 7, 2002

Closed Date: 2005

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On March 7, 2002, children of lawful permanent U.S. residents filed a lawsuit under 28 U.S.C. Section 2201 in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief, challenging the validity of an "age-out" provision in regulations governing nonimmigrant "V" visas. V visas were established as part of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act of 2000 (LIFE Act) and granted temporary lawful status to spouses and children of l…

On March 7, 2002, children of lawful permanent U.S. residents filed a lawsuit under 28 U.S.C. Section 2201 in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief, challenging the validity of an "age-out" provision in regulations governing nonimmigrant "V" visas. V visas were established as part of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act of 2000 (LIFE Act) and granted temporary lawful status to spouses and children of lawful permanent residents while they were waiting for immigrant visas. The regulation at issue, 8 CFR § 214.15(g), included an "age-out" restriction which limited the period of admission, or extension, for a child under a V visa, such that it would expire on the day prior to the child's 21st birthday.

The government moved to dismiss the case, or to transfer venue. That motion was denied. The parties then filed cross-motions for summary judgment. The District Court (Judge David O. Carter) denied plaintiff's motion and granted summary judgment for the government. Akhtar v. Burzynski, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27282 (C.D.Cal. Oct. 21 2002). The plaintiff children appealed.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (Senior Circuit Judge Browning) reversed and remanded, holding that the INS' interpretation of the age-out provisions of 8 C.F.R. § 214.15(g) was contrary to Congress' intent and frustrated congressional policy. Akhtar v. Burzynski, 384 F.3d 1193 (9th Cir. 2004),

While the Akhtar v. Burzynski decision only invalidated the "age-out" provisions in the Ninth Circuit, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, successor to the INS, subsequently decided to apply Akhtar on a nation-wide basis.

Summary Authors

Dan Dalton (11/29/2007)

People


Judge(s)

Browning, James Robert (California)

Carter, David O. (California)

Nakazato, Arthur (California)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Dupont, Robert J. (California)

Attorney for Defendant

Hikida, Katherine M. (California)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Documents in this case

8:02-cv-00245

Docket [PACER]

Burhan Akhtar v. Michael D. Hestor

Jan. 24, 2005

Jan. 24, 2005

Docket
14

8:02-cv-00245

Minute Order [Denying Motion to Transfer Venue and Denying Motion to Dismiss]

Akhtar v. Heston

July 24, 2002

July 24, 2002

Order/Opinion
30

8:02-cv-00245

Opinion

Akhtar v. Burnzynski

Oct. 21, 2002

Oct. 21, 2002

Order/Opinion

2002 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 27282

02-57037

Opinion

Akhtar v. Burnzynski

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Oct. 5, 2004

Oct. 5, 2004

Order/Opinion

384 F.3d 1193

49

8:02-cv-00245

Order [RE: Further Proceedings]

Jan. 24, 2005

Jan. 24, 2005

Order/Opinion

Docket

Last updated March 25, 2025, 8:35 a.m.

ECF Number Date Description Link
1 March 7, 2002

COMPLAINT filed; 60 days Summons(es) issued referred to Discovery Arthur Nakazato (mt) (Entered: 03/15/2002)

PACER
2 March 7, 2002

CERTIFICATION AS TO INTERESTED PARTIES filed by plaintiffs (mt) (Entered: 03/15/2002)

PACER
3 April 16, 2002

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT [1-1] by plaintiffs Burhan Akhtar, Rechy Monzon Sese; adding Emerson Angeles. Summons not issued (mg) (Entered: 04/23/2002)

PACER
4 May 6, 2002

RETURN OF SUMMONS AND PROOF OF SERVICE executed upon defendant John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States by serving S/C to Laura Villa, Process Clerk; and defendant The INS by serving S/C to Kevin Riley, District Counsel; Service by Federal on 4/10/02 via personal service. Via cert mail to John Ashcroft on 4/4/02; original rtn rct card signed for by Ernest Parker on 4/16/02 is attached (mg) Modified on 05/09/2002 (Entered: 05/09/2002)

PACER
4 May 6, 2002

RETURN OF SUMMONS AND PROOF OF SERVICE executed upon defendants Michael D Heston, Director of the INS & James W. Ziglar, Commissioner of the INS; by Federal on 4/4/02 via cert mail by serving S/C. Original rtn rct card addressed to Michael D. Heston, signed for by D. Goss on 4/8/02 is attached. Original rtn rct card addressed to James W. Ziglar, signed for by M. Reed (undated) is attached (mg) (Entered: 05/09/2002)

PACER
5 June 11, 2002

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION by Federal defendants Michael D Heston, et al to dismiss ; memo of P&A; motion hearing set for 8:30 7/22/02 (mt) (Entered: 06/12/2002)

PACER
7 June 24, 2002

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION by Federal defendants Michael D Hestor et al, to transfer case to the Western District of Missouri ; memo of P&A with exhibits; motion hearing set for 8:30 7/22/02 (mt) (Entered: 06/25/2002)

PACER
8 July 3, 2002

OPPOSITION by plaintiff to motion to transfer case to the Western District of Missouri [7-1] (csb) (Entered: 07/05/2002)

PACER
9 July 3, 2002

OPPOSITION by plaintiffs to Dfts' motion to dismiss [5-1]; motion to substitute ptys under FRCP 25(D); memo of P/A; Decl of Robert J Dupont (mg) (Entered: 07/09/2002)

PACER
10 July 15, 2002

REPLY BRIEF by Federal defendants re motion to dismiss [5-1] (mt) (Entered: 07/16/2002)

PACER
11 July 15, 2002

REPLY BRIEF by Federal defendants re motion to transfer case to the Western District of Missouri [7-1] (mt) (Entered: 07/16/2002)

PACER
12 July 19, 2002

MINUTES (In Chambers) by Judge David O. Carter: taking Federal dfts motions to dismiss [5-1] and to transfer case to Western District of Missouri [7-1] under submission. Hrg set for 7/22/02 is removed from the crt's cal. Ptys will be srvd w/the crt's ruling. CR: Not Present (mt) (Entered: 07/22/2002)

PACER
13 July 24, 2002

ORDER by Judge David O. Carter setting scheduling conf for 8:30am on 10/7/02 READ IMMEDIATELY (see doc for specifics) (mt) (Entered: 07/25/2002)

PACER
14 July 24, 2002

MINUTES (in chambers): denying dfts' motion to transfer case to the Western District of Missouri [7-1] & denying dfts' motion to dismiss [5-1]; plfs' 2nd A/C is ord filed; the ptys shall file any intended motionso for summ jgm w/in 30 days of the date of this ord; by Judge David O. Carter CR: not present (rmi) (Entered: 07/26/2002)

PACER
15 July 24, 2002

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT [3-1] by plaintiff terminating defendant Michael D Hestor; adding dft James J Burzynski. Summons not issued (mt) (Entered: 07/28/2002)

PACER
16 Aug. 23, 2002

NOTICE OF MOTION by plaintiffs Burhan Akhtar, Rechy Monzon Sese, Emerson Angeles for summary judgment ; motion hearing set for 8:30 9/30/02 (yc) (Entered: 08/27/2002)

PACER
17 Aug. 23, 2002

DECLARATION of Robert J Dupont by plaintiffs Burhan Akhtar, Rechy Monzon Sese, Emerson Angeles in suppt of motion for summary judgment [16-1] (yc) (Entered: 08/28/2002)

PACER
18 Aug. 23, 2002

MEMORANDUM of PA by plaintiffs Burhan Akhtar, Rechy Monzon Sese, Emerson Angeles in support of motion for summary judgment [16-1] (yc) (Entered: 08/28/2002)

PACER
19 Aug. 23, 2002

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION by defendant James J Burzynski for summary judgment ; motion hearing set for 8:30 9/30/02 (yc) (Entered: 08/28/2002)

PACER
20 Sept. 12, 2002

EX PARTE APPLICATION filed by Federal defendants for an order (1) cont 9/30/02 hrgs on plfs' & dfts' mots for S/J; (2) cont FRCP 26(f) conf; Rule 16(b) conf; & ext rule 26(f) rpt filing ddl ; memo of P&A; decls; & exhibits (mt) (Entered: 09/16/2002)

PACER
21 Sept. 16, 2002

ORDER by Judge David O. Carter: granting ex parte application for an order (1) cont 9/30/02 hrgs on plfs' & dfts' mots for S/J; (2) cont FRCP 26(f) conf; Rule 16(b) conf; & ext rule 26(f) rpt filing ddl [20-1]; resetting hearing on motion for summary judgment [16-1] and [19-1] to 8:30 10/21/02; mandatory status/scheduling conf cont to 8:30 12/2/02 ; dfts' & plfs' opposition for summ jgm to be filed & served by 10/7/02; dft's & plf's reply to be filed & served by 10/14/02; conf deadline cont to date w/in 30 days after Crt rules on ptys mots; report shall be filed nlt 44 days after Crt's decision on ptys mots; (see doc for fur specifics) (ln) (Entered: 09/17/2002)

PACER
22 Sept. 17, 2002

NOTICE OF NON-OPPOSITION filed by plaintiffs to dft's appl for an ord cont the 9/30/02 hrg on plfs' and dfts' motions for summary judgment (mt) (Entered: 09/20/2002)

PACER
23 Oct. 7, 2002

OPPOSITION by plaintiffs to dft's motion for summary judgment [19-1] (mt) (Entered: 10/15/2002)

PACER
24 Oct. 7, 2002

STATEMENT disputed facts and conclusions of law by plaintiffs in suppt of plfs' opp to dfts' motion for summary judgment [19-1] (mt) (Entered: 10/15/2002)

PACER
25 Oct. 7, 2002

OPPOSITION by defendants to plfs' motion for summary judgment [16-1] (mt) (Entered: 10/15/2002)

PACER
26 Oct. 7, 2002

STATEMENT of genuine issues of material fact by defendants (mt) (Entered: 10/15/2002)

PACER
27 Oct. 15, 2002

REPLY BRIEF by defendant James J Burzynski (mt) (Entered: 10/21/2002)

PACER
28 Oct. 15, 2002

REPLY by plaintiffs in suppt of plf's motion for summary judgment [16-1]; memo of P&A (mt) (Entered: 10/22/2002)

PACER
31 Oct. 18, 2002

OBJECTION filed by Federal defendants to plfs' req to submit additional legal materials at the hearing on the parties' motion for summary judgment (mt) (Entered: 10/25/2002)

PACER
29 Oct. 21, 2002

JGM GRANTING DFT'S MOT FOR SUMM JGM by Judge David O. Carter: dft's mot having come on regularly for hrg on 10/21/02 & in accordance w/Crt's Ord on 10/21/02, granting dft's motion for summary judgment [19-1]; terminating case (MD JS-6) (see doc for specifics) (ln) (Entered: 10/22/2002)

PACER
30 Oct. 21, 2002

ORDER DENYING PLF'S MOT FOR SUMM JGM & GRANTING DFT'S MOT FOR SUMM JGM by Judge David O. Carter: denying plf's motion for summary judgment [16-1], granting dft's cross-motion for summary judgment [19-1] (see doc for fur specifics) (ln) (Entered: 10/22/2002)

PACER
32 Oct. 21, 2002

MINUTES OF MOTION HEARING held by Judge David O. Carter: Tentative ruling issued to cnsl, a copy of which is attached hereto. Motion by Federal dfts for summary judgment [19-1]; motion by plfs for summary judgment [16-1] taken under submission. CR: Jane Sutton (mt) (Entered: 10/29/2002)

PACER
Oct. 21, 2002

PLACED IN FILE - NOT USED lodged prop decl & inj ord of the crt (mt) (Entered: 10/28/2002)

PACER
Oct. 21, 2002

PLACED IN FILE - NOT USED lodged plf's separate stmt of U/F & conclusions of law in suppt of ntc of mot & mot for S/J (mt) (Entered: 10/28/2002)

PACER
Oct. 21, 2002

PLACED IN FILE - NOT USED lodged stmt of U/F & conclusions of law (mt) (Entered: 10/28/2002)

PACER
33 Nov. 21, 2002

NOTICE OF APPEAL by plaintiff Burhan Akhtar, plaintiff Rechy Monzon Sese, plaintiff Emerson Angeles to 9th C/A from Dist. Court Ord fld 10/21/02 [30-1], Jgm fld 10/21/02 [29-2] (cc: Robert J. Dupont; AUSA ) Fee: Billed (weap) (Entered: 11/25/2002)

PACER
34 Nov. 21, 2002

REPRESENTATION STATEMENT re appeal [33-1] (pjap) (Entered: 12/02/2002)

PACER
35 Dec. 3, 2002

TRANSCRIPT DESIGNATION and ordering form for dates: 10/21/02 CR: Jane Sutton (dlu) (Entered: 12/03/2002)

PACER
Dec. 9, 2002

Appeal Fee Paid re [33-1] fee in amount of $ 105.00 (Receipt # 28209) (dlu) (Entered: 12/09/2002)

PACER
36 Dec. 12, 2002

NOTIFICATION by Circuit Court of Appellate Docket Number appeal [33-1] 02-57037 (weap) (Entered: 12/12/2002)

PACER
39 Jan. 30, 2003

EX PARTE APPLICATION filed by plaintiffs to shorten time to 2/3/03 for hearing on motion for stay of adverse administrative actions & injunction against detention & commencement of deportation proceedings pending appeal [37-1] (mg) (Entered: 02/04/2003)

PACER
40 Jan. 30, 2003

OPPOSITION by defendants to ex parte application to shorten time to 2/3/03 for hearing on motion for stay of adverse administrative actions & injunction against detention & commencement of deportation proceedings pending appeal [37-1] [39-1] (mg) (Entered: 02/04/2003)

PACER
37 Feb. 4, 2003

MOTION by plaintiffs for stay of adverse administrative actions & injunction against detention & commencement of deportation proceedings pending appeal ; motion hearing set for 8:30 2/12/03; Lodged 1/30/03 (mg) (Entered: 02/04/2003)

PACER
38 Feb. 4, 2003

NOTICE OF motion to hear Plaintiff's motion for stay of adverse administrative actions & injunction against detention & commencement of proceedings pending appeal [37-1] filed by plaintiffs (mg) (Entered: 02/04/2003)

PACER
41 Feb. 4, 2003

MINUTES (In Chambers) by Judge David O. Carter: granting plf Akhtar's ex parte application to shorten time on motion for stay [39-1]; Court GRANTS the application as to plf Akhtar, but DENIES the application as to plfs Sese and Emerson (see doc for specifics); Court sets hearing on plf Akhtar's motion for stay of adverse administrative actions & injunction against detention & commencement of deportation proceedings pending appeal [37-1] for 8:00am on 2/12/03. CR: Not Present (mt) (Entered: 02/05/2003)

PACER
42 Feb. 12, 2003

DENIED BY ORDER of Judge David O. Carter: [Proposed] Ord Granting Mot for Stay of Adverse Administrative Actions & Injunction Against Detention and Commencement of Deportation Proceedings Pending Appeal; lodged 01/30/03 (ln) (Entered: 02/13/2003)

PACER
43 Feb. 12, 2003

MINUTES of motion hearing heald by Judge David O. Carter: Motion by plf Burhan Akhtar for stay of adverse administrative actions & injunction against detention & commencement of deportation proceedings pending appeal [37-1] is DENIED as premature. Court lacks jurisdiction to decide this matter. CR: Jane Sutton (mt) (Entered: 02/16/2003)

PACER
Feb. 12, 2003

PLACED IN FILE - NOT USED [Proposed] Order Granting Plaintiff's Ex Parte Appication to Shorten Time to Hear Plaintiff's Motion (tso) (Entered: 02/16/2003)

PACER
44 Nov. 29, 2004

MANDATE of 9th CCA filed as to Appeal to Circuit Court [33], CCA # 02-57037. The judgment of said district court is reversed and remanded. Mandate received in this district on 12/1/04. (ghap, ) Modified on 12/2/2004 (ghap, ). (Entered: 12/02/2004)

PACER
46 Dec. 3, 2004

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Attorney Fees filed by plaintiffs Motion set for hearing on 2/7/2005 at 08:30 AM before Honorable David O. Carter. (dmjr, ) (Entered: 12/07/2004)

PACER
47 Dec. 28, 2004

NOTICE of hearing on judgment/mandate/order from US Court of Appeals on 1/24/05 8:30am before Judge Carter (dmjr, ) (Entered: 12/28/2004)

PACER
Dec. 28, 2004

Set Hearings: hearing on 9th CCA mandate set for hearing on 1/24/2005 at 08:30 AM before Honorable David O. Carter. (dmjr, ) (Entered: 12/29/2004)

PACER
48 Jan. 21, 2005

STATUS REPORT filed by Defendants Immigration and Naturalization Service, James Ziglar, John Ashcroft, James J Burzynski. (dmjr, ) (Entered: 01/26/2005)

PACER
49 Jan. 24, 2005

ORDER by Judge David O. Carter re: further proceedings(dmjr, ) (Entered: 01/26/2005)

PACER
50 Jan. 24, 2005

MINUTES OF Hearing held before Judge David O. Carter order re further proceedings filed:, denying MOTION for Attorney Fees[46] Court Reporter: D Gale/J S Rule. (dmjr, ) (Entered: 01/26/2005)

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory:

California

Case Type(s):

Immigration and/or the Border

Key Dates

Filing Date: March 7, 2002

Closing Date: 2005

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Three non-U.S. Citizens whose families filed I-130 forms on their behalf seeking visas for entry into the United States and who were denied V-Visas by the U.S. INS following their admission to the U.S. and after their 21 birthdays.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Unknown

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Federal

United States Immigration and Naturalization Services

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Ex Parte Young (Federal) or Bivens

Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq.

Other Dockets:

Central District of California 8:02-cv-00245

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 02-57037

Available Documents:

Any published opinion

Trial Court Docket

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff OR Mixed

Relief Granted:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Issues

Immigration/Border:

Constitutional rights

Family Separation

Temporary protected status

Visas - criteria

Visas - procedures

Recommended Citation